How could they have used theory differently? (note: this doesn't necessarily mean they should use a different theory, though they could. Are they missing constructs? Was something poorly defined? Is there an alternative you can come up with?)

**The rubric and two examples are attached.
A review of peer-reviewed journal articles that discuss the application of theory to a public health problem. Each article review should be 1-2 pages and will have three parts:
1.APA citation and external web link for article
2.Summary: discuss the research question and/or hypotheses. Where possible, identify the:
Population: who was studied? How big was the group? Were there subgroups?
Intervention (or exposure): what therapy, risk factor, or stimulus was measured? (independent variable)
Comparison or control: was there a comparison group or other alternative?
Outcome: what were they measuring? (dependent variable)
3.Theory: describe how theory was integrated into the paper, addressing the following points:
What parts of the theory were used, and for what purpose? For example, was the theory used to inform the research question? The intervention design? The instruments (questionnaires/surveys)? The outcomes?
How did the authors operationalize the constructs?
Was the theory appropriate for the population and research question?
How could they have used theory differently? (note: this doesn’t necessarily mean they should use a different theory, though they could. Are they missing constructs? Was something poorly defined? Is there an alternative you can come up with?)
**The rubric and two examples are attached.